Learn how to argue

With the NY Senate passing the bill to allow gay marriage just last night, it's been a hot topic today. The latest viral campaign has been on Facebook with a post that goes as follow.

So let me get this STRAIGHT. ..Kelsey Grammer can end a 15yr marriage by phone, Larry King is on divorce #9, Britney Spears had a 55hr marriage, Jesse James & Tiger Woods, while married, were having sex with EVERYONE, 53% of Americans get divorced and 30-60% cheat on their spouses. Yet, same-sex marriage is going to destroy the institution of marriage? Really? Re-post if you find this ironic! 

Before I go any further, let me take a minute to clear the air. I do NOT support gay marriage. This is my personal opinion. This has been ingrained in my through my years growing up in a Catholic church and my conservative Republican ideologies that have formed as I became an adult. I'm not here to argue the merits of gay marriage or about being gay at all. I'm just on another kick about word usage and context. However, my own personal lean and feelings will probably be evident throughout my explanation. If you don't like it, I understand and you are more than welcome to close your browser or start your own blog. This, however, is not the forum for discussion about it. It is MY personal blog which contains my personal thoughts and opinions. As a reminder, my beef at the moment is with the post itself and not the topic.

So these celebrities did some outlandish things. That's what celebrities do. Whether it's marriage related or their salaries, they are not the average person. They are certainly not representative of the whole. Since when do we, in science, use the smallest percentage as a reference point for the majority. Do we do that in democracy too? How about in match? Do we use the mean (average) or median (middle) or do we look at the most extreme boundaries? Even the most extreme candidates for office, within their respective parties, rarely get the vote. It's the centrists that people gravitate towards. Large percentages and middle ground is the fat part of the bell curve where most people reside on any topic.

So using the celebrity facts is nonsensical. I mean when you think about it, the author of this post used Britney Spears as a reference. This is the same woman who drives with her kid on her lap, shows the world her vagina and then shaves her head. Clearly not the average middle American.

The point is that these people who wreck the institution of marriage are not representative of the institution of marriage. They are whacked out cases. The institution of marriage is just as intact as it always ways. It still stands for the same thing. Whether people honor that or not is their own personal business but the constructs, the sanctity of marriage still exists, as it is an ideal and not a tangible thing. It certainly is not tied to the actions of a few individuals.

This post that's floating around is also predicated on the fact that gay people will not get divorced. Who is to say that the current 53% divorce rate (if that's even accurate) is not added to by gay people. Maybe it'll go up markedly for all we know. Maybe it'll go down and it won't be due to the better gay people and it'll be done simply because by the numbers there are more marriages so each divorce impacts the percentage less meaning it appears to go down. In that case, numbers can go up but percentage will not go up and may, in fact, go down.

So will the institution of marriage be destroyed? Possibly. That depends on how you define it. Is it the union of two people in love? Then probably not. Two people who are united regardless of how they feel? Definitely won't wreck it. Do you define it as the union of a man and a woman? Then yes, gay marriage destroys the institution of marriage. So it's all about context and definition.

As always, I don't take issue with what people say as much as I do with how they say it. That post is ignorant and nonsensical. It does not help prove anyone's case. However, it is emotionally charged and, therefore, will be followed and restated by the moronic masses.

I don't wish divorce on people. It's messy and expensive and it sucks - I know, I've been through it. But I'm curious to see what happens when gay marriage gets passed and just as many gay marriages are ending as straight marriages. Then what have we done? We've cluttered the divorce courts and broken up more homes. People are people regardless of their sexual orientation. Gay couples will fight about money and infidelity just like straight couples. Are they entitled to lose half their shit like the rest of us? Fine, go for it. I surrender. I don't agree with it, but go ahead and be as miserable as we are if you feel the need.

My parents have been married almost 40 years. They had ups and downs and they're still together. I know lots of people who are. From their generation I know more together than apart. From mine, it's the opposite. So maybe it's a cultural thing. The bigger, better, faster, more, I want it now, instant gratification generation in the United States that causes divorce. It's what causes people to make snap decisions about both getting married and leaving the marriage. Guess what? Gay folks are part of the same generation.

Let's see if you call out the gay celebrities for their horrible behavior too when it starts happening.

Morons

I can't keep it in. I just can't. I see all this stupidity online and it drives me crazy. I often wonder if we're getting dumber because of technology or are we seeing more of it because of technology and I think it's a combination of the two. Anyone who has been following this blog knows how I feel about the to, two, too thing, there, their, and they're and my biggest pet peeve - your and you're. It makes my skin crawl every time I see some use your in place of you're. Some of my closest friends do it and it drives me bonkers. You're is YOU ARE. It's two goddamn words. How can you not know the difference?

The online stupidity is not relegated to the grammatically inept. Oh no. Every kind of ignoramus has found a voice online. The one that inspired this tirade had to do with geographical directions. Someone, on Facebook, referenced a story that was brewing and commented on is direction. Dopey outlined her hopes that the storm wouldn't hit where she lived - which was the opposite direction of where it was just said to be headed. She immediately got called out by original poster and rather than admitting she's a moron without an iota of common sense, she got defensive. As if she SHOULDN'T know.

Here's the funny part. She claimed that she didn't have mountains around her like in her home town to use a point of reference. Guess where she lives? On the Gulf Coast in Florida. Well let's see. There's a fuck-ton of water near you. My bet is that it's not a lake. It's the Gulf of Mexico. So... could that be North or South? Bingo was his name. You have a reference point.

How about the fact that outside of areas like NYC, almost all roads have directions. Interstate 10 only goes East or West, just like Hwy 98 in Florida. You use these terms constantly. If you don't know then you're a moron, plain and simple. You have every right to be a moron. What you do not have the right to be, however, is indignant about your stupidity. It's as if you earned the right to be stupid and you defend it so vehemently. You're proud of sounding incapable of passing the first grade.

This goes on all day. I understand not everyone is going to change the world. I know that nobody is perfect. The world needs ditch diggers as much as it needs visionaries. I get all that. I refuse to relinquish my feelings that adults who are capable of driving, voting and, most importantly, breeding should be able to complete an elementary school level exam. I will not surrender that belief no matter what. Maybe it makes me harsh. Maybe it makes me an arrogant asshole. I don't know, but that's it.

We are dumber than ever and we're more obvious about it. Schools lack... something... I have no idea what, but students aren't getting the information or it's not being reinforced. The Internet breeds laziness. There are tons of free dictionaries out there. Use them. If you can't spell antidisestablishmentarianism, you're forgiven. If you can't tell the difference between your and you're, then YOU'RE a moron.

It's that simple. Pick up a book, read a newspaper, pay attention. Do something to sound less stupid. For crying out loud, we had a show called "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?" because everyone knew enough contestants were not.

This is embarrassing. I'm moving to Bolivia.

Sad about this guy?

If I'm reading the news correctly, a guy who made a living by doing stupid, dangerous things died in a very similar way last night. Ryan Dunn, formerly of Jackass fame, was in a car wreck last night that killed himself and his passenger. This guy was known for doing stupid, daredevil stunts. Preliminary reports from the accident say that speed and alcohol may have been factors.

I was never really a watcher of Jackass. The name itself implies it's devoid of all possible intellectuality. I've seen it from time to time and they had their funny bits, but they always seemed to go too far into the realm of pure stupidity. Just totally inane. I couldn't handle it. Especially when they went from stupid to disgusting.

Facebook and Twitter are all a buzz with people being upset and missing Ryan Dunn. What has this guy done since Jackass? Was he even one of the main player when he was on Jackass? He's most famous for putting a toy car in his asshole. Why do we praise and worship stupid people who do stupid things and enable them to do more of it? Then when the most likely thing in the world happens and they kill themselves being the exact person we helped condition them to be, we're upset.

Do people really hold so little value in their lives and have nothing better to do than watch people purposely hurt themselves? And how do these people get so many viewers to line up behind them and consider them heroes? I've often spoken about the focus of America and why we're looked at like we are morons by the rest of the world. Maybe weeping on Facebook about the loss of an ignoramus who hurt himself on purpose is part of it.

I'm definitely confused. I could not possibly give less of a shit about the death of Ryan Dunn. Sure, nobody wants to see and other human being get killed. But he's just like any other person and gets no special treatment from me. I'm partially disturbed that Ryan Dunn has impacted me to the point that I've used this time to write this post. He was a moron. A true Jackass and while I don't wish death on anyone I can't saw I'm shocked. He acted stupid. He drank and drove and posted pictures to his Twitter while doing it. Frankly, he got what was coming to him. Still sad?

Two way street

I know in recent months I've done some bitching about things in life. I hit a rough patch with my social life, but all that has slowed down. Those that I don't get along with and have beefs with have been eliminated. My life has been decidedly less dramatic. What's funny about it is that I've been the same person throughout all of it. I haven't budged on who I am, how I act, what I think or any part of my person. The people that are still in my life are wonderful, trustworthy people. We all have fun. We hang at the pool and get some sun, have some beers and then grill and enjoy tasty food and good companionship. We get together on Xbox and save the world. It's easy. It's fun.

When there's a social agenda, I pick up the phone. Sometimes they pick up the phone. It's very natural. It's a two way street. Not everyone subscribes to that policy though. There are some people around that require chasing. They want to hang out. They want to have fun. They enjoy time when they are all together, but if you don't call them, they don't call you. If you don't and they hear that people have been social, they get upset.

This has gone so far that the be all, end all of friendship statuses, Facebook, has shown it. Someone didn't get a phone call over something and chose to click the magic "block" button. Keep in mind that the entire situation was predicated on tentative plans for some point. I didn't call, they didn't call. I have my life and they have theirs and as anyone knows, time flies by. So we got caught up, didn't make plans, they moved and now they're pissed at whoever didn't meet their expectations.

Normally I'd rant and rave for days on end at the ridiculousness, but I'm not going to. I can look to my right as I type this and see two of my closest friends hanging out enjoying a quiet Sunday before we head to the pool and realize that the drama just doesn't matter.

As for the rest of the folks that require the constant chasing... I have no beef with them in any way shape of form. I'm also not going to hunt them down. You know my number and where I life. Wanna hang out? Call. If not, then don't. It's all good. When we see each other we have fun and enjoy it but I have enough going on that I'm not begging anyone.

I have my job. I have school. Within the next few months I'll be (with help from those who understand the two-way street) forming a new company. In 2 years I'm moving back to New Jersey. The last thing I need is to worry about any of this nonsense. So, I'm not going to.

Whoever shows up and puts the time in will get the same in return from me. Anyone is welcome to step it up and increase our relationship at any point. Until then, I'll be investing my time into things that have a proven ROI.

Homogeneity

The military is SO diverse, yet so alike. Sure we come from different areas and backgrounds but once we get here, we're all the same. Part of it is by design. It's a unity thing. It's why we wear uniforms and squadrons are called units and we march the same way, all together, they laugh alike, they walk alike, sometimes they even talk alike - too much Nick at Nite over the year I guess. Ignore the Patty Duke song. Anyway, we become homogenized. There are parts that just happen. It's not just a job. It's a lifestyle. We work and live together. We are all out of our elements. So we gel and become like one another.

In the process, we lose a piece of our identities. I don't like this. My identity is unique and complex. I come from an area that wasn't bad but not fantastic. Some friends still live with their grandmothers and work at gas stations. We had a 3 bedroom house and a pool in the yard. And I'm talking about before I moved to NJ. This is from the old NY days. My life was very Yin and Yang as I think back. We could hang out at a family barbecue and swim in the pool in the yard in the same day as applying...umm... urban artwork. Lots of weird duality.

My Queens crew had its own name and everyone in it had their own names as well. There was Brian Garlic, Skelly Miller, Keas, Wake, Ronnie Fingers, Biz, Rid, and others and since I moved away I was affectionately called "Jason from Jersey." And I mean ALL the time. As long as it was to say, it was used in its entirety even when addressing me.

We had stockings hanging in our favorite bar at Christmas time. We injected made up or shortened words into our vernacular and they'd spread. Do you remember the term "herb" for someone who was considered like a loser or nerd? Started in my old neighborhood. If I had to guess, it was one of Skelly's, but I just know it began near me. We said it years before I heard it anywhere else. There's a list of things I said nonstop all day long as part of my speech patterns that I lost when I came into the military. Some were pretty stupid to be honest, but that's not the point. I didn't give them up because they were stupid. They just faded over time being part of this vanilla lifestyle. Maybe I would have outgrown some, but maybe not. I hate that being in such an insular society like the military has caused me to conform. I'm far from outlandish by nature, but lost any little bit of flair.

I've been thinking about re-introducing these words and spreading them around the southland. They already say stupid shit like, "I'm fixin' to go to the store" and the forever dumb "y'all" anyway. So here are some... don't judge me.

-Herb - loser, jerk, overall putz.
-Schroom - bathroom
-Pcs - hot girl. Crude people see a hot girl and call her a "piece." This is subtle, as pcs is the abbreviation for pieces.
-Shrab (maybe shroub. Not sure how to spell a word that's not real)- a hard time. When your wife is nagging you to do something, she's giving you shrab.
-WhattaWeGot.
--Greeting. "Hey buddy. WhattaWeGot."
--Clarification. "Wanna go eat?" "Depends. WhattaWeGot."
--Confusion. "I don't understand why this won't work. WhattaWeGot with this thing?"
-Mad - modifier to mean a lot or intense. "It was mad hot out today." Can even be used alone. "You like that movie?" and you say, "yeah. mad."
-Round - all encompassing. Not round like a circle, but like a round of boxing or a round of drinks.
--Replaces shrab or adds to it. "She won't leave me alone, she's always giving me a round (or a round of shrab)."
--"You want sushi?" "Nah, I don't really have a round."

That's all I can think of at the moment, as these have been pushed into the depths of my memory. The actual terms aren't as important as it is to reclaim all of me before I let go of parts to mesh into this [temporary] life. Hard to separate yourself and be unique and have vision and be innovative when you fall in with the flock. So I'm going to be me like I always have, and this may be the opposite of what the world truly needs, but I'm going to be MORE of me - like I used to be.

I also can't wait to annoy the shit out of all the southerners when the full fledged "yankee" in me resurfaces.

We are gathered here today...

If I remember correctly, in about 4 hours I was supposed to get married. Today was the day. Friday, June 10, 2011. It would have been in planning longer than 18 months. We had a magnificent place in New Jersey called Macaluso's that was just beautiful. The food would have been amazing. Everything about this day would have been grandiose. I'd have enjoyed every minute of it. The truth of the matter is that, while I'd have loved it when it happened, we all know who these days are really for.

Before I go on, I know some of you are wondering how I could have been getting married if I was already married. Linda, sometimes referred to as "dummy" or "the leech," and I were married civilly and we were planning this gigantic wedding event in the church and celebration that followed.

One year ago today, she left for New Jersey for wedding planning. It was during this trip that she ordered, booked, bought, or scheduled thousands of dollars of stuff for our wedding in an all-expense paid shopping spree kind of way. I paid, my parents paid and she grabbed like a spoiled brat. I was here in Mississippi receiving phone calls with "I want" and "I need money" reminiscent of a toddler in Toys R Us. It was reported to me that she had near tantrums on more than one occasion.

This is a girl who comes from nothing and was handed everything. A princess wedding. A dream come true or as she put it "finally getting everything I stopped wanting because I never thought I'd get it." Fourteen days later she retuned and sixteen days after that she left. Imagine that. Those of you who know me well, know the story of how this all came to be. It's pure insanity.

Today was supposed to be the happiest day of my life and meanwhile, look at what this last year has turned into. I'm angry at myself for allowing this to happen and be disappointed again. I'm furious at her for letting me believe she was one person and then showing herself to be another. I'm regretful at the mistakes I've made along the way with her, but I'm relieved because it all accelerated the process. More than anything I'm thankful that we didn't spend the equivalent of an S class Mercedes before she decided to flip out or, God forbid, have children together.

I can't say that even .0001% of me wants her back. Maybe .01% even wants to see her face again. I'm sorry for all the letdowns of my family. I'm sorry for the money lost in all this. I'm sorry I'm in Mississippi alone (I can't imagine reenlisting if I was solo at the time). I guess I miss the idea of what it all was supposed to be; the next chapter of my life and the most amazing celebration possible to mark the start of all of it. It's over and done with now. Service providers have our deposits, we all have disappointments and somehow in the blink of an eye I went from having a future beautiful bride to an ex-wife. It was awesome. We were so alike and so happy.

Now we're just two strangers connected only by the bill collectors that call for her.

Weiner's Wiener

Guess what everybody? A politician had an affair. The end.

Ok, I'll keep going. So Weiner had some 26 year old send pictures, messages, etc into ABC about the year affair she had with Democrat Anthony Weiner. He admitted that it was him and that he was wrong. Do you believe him? There were a reported total of six different women over three years. This was not a one-time mistake. Before we attack his character, let's turn to the citizens of New York (that's who he represents, in case the only thing you knew about him is that he shows his pecker to people he shouldn't). Anyway, New Yorkers? Has Weiner served you well? That just sounds funny. Seriously, has he done a good job keeping you satisfied? No really... has this man done his job? If so, then who cares what he does in his marriage? Maybe you can't trust a word he says.

And this is not partisan because both sides of the coin are full of hypocrisy. Republicans scream and yell about morals and family. Then they knock up the maid or do "The Larry Craig Shuffle" and tap their feet in a men's room in a morse code pattern that apparently means "nice ass."

The Democrats are no better. They're busy spitting granola all over the place in an effort to say leave us alone and let us love whoever we want, however we want - even if it's the tree we live in. Weiner was a democrat.

The Republicans are in favor of Capitalism and big business and don't want to over-regulate things except who can marry who, who can get an abortion, and every personal detail of what they consider right and wrong (tap, tap, tap-tap-tap, tap-tap just means do you have spare toilet paper?).

The Democrats yell at the government and say, "you can't tell us who to love," but come running back and say "give us welfare, we need help. please almighty government take care of the masses."

See? It's all nonsense.

I guess I could give a shit less what these people do in their private lives. I watch actors/actresses because I like movies. I don't care how many third world countries Angelina Jolie goes to so she can dust off another baby and take it home. I watch sports because I like to see grown men beating the shit out of one another and it's a great reason to drink more beer. Don't care if they have unique ways of playing with their pets. I vote for politicians because they enact laws in concert with my beliefs. I don't care what they do. I don't even care if their beliefs are the same as mine. I care that they will fight for my beliefs. I'm in the military. You think I wholeheartedly agree with every military maneuver completed since I joined? I don't have to believe in every second of every minute of every day, but I'll serve like I do. That's my job.

So if Anthony Weiner wasn't getting any and decided to get some in ways he shouldn't have, but... the state of New York is in better shape, then so be it. Maybe a little action is good for the guy. Maybe he does a better job. His no name next door neighbor has probably been banging the babysitter and the wife is sleeping with the Tennis pro at the club. You don't know about it so you don't care? Does that make it right? No. It just makes it their personal life. Those people probably show up to work every day and do an outstanding job because ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER.

So to Weiner, and his wiener, I hope it was worth it and I'm sorry the scandal is, more than likely, gonna get you fired. The real shame is that we left Europe to escape persecution and control only to come here and continue to be uptight, prudes. Nothing really changed. We just have better technology now.

Did you learn anything from it?

As I mentioned once before, we all make mistakes in life. However, the only real mistake is the one you learn nothing from. If you do something you shouldn't and take away some value, then it's a learning experience. If you don't, then it's truly a mistake. This is not about any one mistake that anyone has made. Rather, it's about allowing history to repeat itself and getting what you deserve. Remember the "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" saying? If the same person fools you twice, in the same way, then it's hard to feel bad for you because you should have known better.

I had this conversation with someone just yesterday who was complaining that people don't change their behavior and he has a hard time with it. We went around and around on the phone and I stopped him finally and said, "if every time you invite me over your house I show up and punch you in the face, eventually you'll stop inviting me over." You learn about bad behavior and avoid it. Now... if you say "I didn't know this was going to happen" then you haven't been paying attention. If you knew it was going to happen and didn't care, then it's on you for welcoming this negativity into your life repeatedly and, therefore, lose the right to complain.

It reminds me of another favorite quote of mine - if you always do what you've always done; you'll always get what you always got. If you don't change your approach, why would the results change. Shit in, shit out, as they say.

Some things are mistakes and there's no way around it. That doesn't mean they have to be a negative force in your life; totally devoid of any value. Ever get a question wrong on a test? Would you get the same question wrong a second time? Hopefully you learned and better negotiate the exam the next time. It sucked to get it wrong, but you found value and learning in the experience and ended up stronger for it. Truth be told, that scenario may even be more positive because the correct answer has been reinforced that much further after getting it wrong the first time.

I see this a lot, and I know I've done it myself at times. It's stupid and counter productive. As humans, we do the wrong thing sometimes, but why do we allow ourselves to repeat it and subject ourselves to the negative circumstances again and again? More importantly, why do we stand for poor treatment from other people repeatedly?

A wise, old friend* of mine mentioned the same thing to me not long ago. He was 100% correct. In business we look for ROI (return on investment). If we consistently lose money on a deal, we stop making the deal. Translate that to relationships and emotions. In both business and science, we make this call after we've collected enough data to do some trend analysis and be sure. Do the same thing in your life.

For those looking to pinpoint hypocrisy in my writing, and I know you exist, I'm not talking about judging people. I've taken a hard line against judgment like that. You can, however, judge the value of a relationship. Do you think an alcoholic judges people who drink? Not necessarily. Will they spend time with people who frequent bars though? Probably not. They have no beef with the person, but choose not to keep company with them, for their methods are in opposition to each other.

I guess I have a hard time watching friends of mine get a raw deal from other people that they know they're gonna get a raw deal from. It's no surprise, you can't change a person, cut your losses and press on. Losing people always sucks, but if the relationship loses more than it gains it's time to walk away. In very rare cases, a single instance is enough to break the bond, but that's not my story today. Today it's about a small, recurring issue that happens so often, it no longer feels small to you. It's a negative trend and a poor standard. Move on, you'll be better for it.



*By the way, my wise, old friend is not old. He's a wise friend and an old friend, as to say we go way back. He, in and of himself, is not old. ;)

Pets = Family

So it's come to my attention that people think I'm ridiculous about my cats. I shouldn't post status updates about them or pictures. When I call them adorable and say that I love them, it's ridiculous and gay. One person may actually believe that I'm gay because of it. Grow up.

Speaking of growing up, I never had pets as a kid. My brother and I had allergies. Mark's were much, much worse. We had fish and he had a turtle. Never cats and dogs. When my ex-wife moved down to SC she had 3 cats and I said "no way." I was not for it. Did not want any cats. So she found homes for 2 of them. The last one was a little skittish and not very friendly and nobody would take him. So she had to bring him. As it turns out, he was cute and very, very funny with all the stupid cat things he'd do. I grew to really like him.

Then we moved to Mississippi and wanted someone for him to play with. So we got Shadow. She was a little kitten and lots of fun. Linda's cat was a few years old and she had him a while. I never saw him from a little kitten. It was like a stepkid. When we got shadow, it was like my own. So when Linda left, I told her she couldn't take Shadow with her. I had 3 requirements that she had to leave behind - her ring, Shadow, and my last name. We named Shadow what we did because she follows me everywhere. She's my shadow.

After Linda left, Shadow was a mess. She's wake up in the middle of the night on my chest doing that crying meow. They don't speak, but they can try to get a point across. She was upset. Her mom and brother left one day and never came back. When I would be upset about the separation, she'd get maternal and climb on me and lick my hands like she was trying to care for me. I know they don't understand what you say when you talk to them and they certainly can't verbalize a response, but I came home to an empty house every day and having another living, breathing creature in the house was comforting.

Immediately, I went to the animal shelter and picked up Herbie. Shadow needed someone to hang around with and her mood improved after about 2 days of sniffing Herbie's ass to determine how she felt about him. Now they're best friends. She takes care of him and mothers him all the time too.

Some months went by and I was in PetSmart. I saw Benny. He had a brother and they were little and cute but I was not about to get 2 more cats. That's insanity. But, I had to go back in the store later that day and sure enough, someone was walking out with his brother right then and there. When I went to the back to see Benny, he was all alone and clearly miserable. I couldn't leave him like that. So I took him home with me.

I have 3 cats. It's a lot. I love Benny boy but I honestly wouldn't have gotten a third one if I could go back and do it all over again. Now that I do have them, I'm also not sorry. People cry when pets die. Movies are made about pets. They are family. You love them and they love you back. I understand it's not traditional for men to have cats and I know people call me the male version of the crazy cat lady that dies alone with 900 cats.

I'm a single guy in an apartment. I leave all day and come and go randomly. I work long hours. Having a dog is not really sensible. The place isn't that big. Dogs can be noisy. The apartment complex only allows for small dogs (which would make me just as gay in the minds of the morons). Most importantly, dogs require structure. So many friends of mine have to go home at certain times to take care of their dogs. That's not for me. So I have cats.

They're playful and loving and keep me company. They things they do make me laugh. Everyone that comes over, loves them because they're friendly to everyone and just want to be pet and played with. As a matter of fact, the night I was in PetSmart I was with a buddy. He and I were gushing over the cuteness of Benny when some tough looking dude walked by. We both straightened right up and stopped. This guy asks, "What they got in there? Dogs or cats?" We said that they were all cats and mostly kittens. So he walks up and looks. Now keep in mind that this guy is tough looking thug kinda guy and the minute he saw Benny, he started to tap on the glass and talk to Benny in a baby voice. Is he gay? His wife and kid were in tow. Maybe he's just not a heartless bastard and can appreciate the cuteness of a baby animal the way people do with kids.

I don't have kids. I no long even have a wife. In 9 days, I was supposed to have a gigantic wedding celebration with my no ex-wife (we did the civil thing and this was gonna be the religious thing and reception). All of that is gone now. It's just me and the cats. No wife, no kids, no roommates. So you can call me gay or think it's ridiculous.

Pets are family for so many people. For me and my situation and how my pet ownership evolved... cats are for me. I enjoy them and give them a good home. They are spoiled brats, to be honest. I am NOT the crazy cat lady. For one, I'm not a woman. Two, I'm not going to die alone. Three, I'm not getting more. Two was enough, but I couldn't resist Benny. So that's where I stand.

Think whatever you want, but I'd personally prefer you spent less time thinking about me being ridiculous and especially gay and went on with your own lives. My cats are my kids, just like 99% of pet owners out there.

Informed Decisions

This morning in the waiting room of the doctor's office, I was eavesdropping on the people in front of me. Truthfully, I was trying to listen to the TV in front of them and they were loud so I couldn't help it. Anyway, I didn't really hear the context of their conversation but I did distinctly hear this "she don't know me so who cares what she thinks about me anyway?" This is a common theme with people. I understand where they're coming from - a total stranger has no investment in your life so why care about their opinion, right? I get it. I just don't agree.

I care very much what strangers think of me. I won't alter myself to fit the image they want necessarily, but I care. It's the people who know me well that I don't care as much about their opinion. I know it sounds crazy, but let me explain. There's a method to my madness.

If I just met you and you don't like me, I get upset. You don't know me yet. Get to know me and make an informed decision. A first impression, while important, is not enough to base a whole decision on. That's like saying, "we tried this new drug to cure cancer on a single lab rat and it didn't work. I guess it's a bust." You need more data points to come to an accurate conclusion.

Now if someone I've known for many years - like Dr. Jim - said, "dude, after 20 years of being your friend I've come to the conclusion that you're just a prick. I can't hang out with you anymore." I'd be hurt. Hell, I'd be devastated because he's one of my best friends in the world, but I'd understand. I can respect that you did your due diligence and put the time in. You know me as well as anyone can and you've decided that I'm not for you. After 20 years, you're sure about your decision because it comes from a very informed place. You've earned the right to decide you don't like me.

Like I mentioned, new people don't know me and likewise I don't know them. What that means to me is that I have no way of knowing how they'll play into my life in the future. Don't decide on me quickly because who knows what we have to offer each other down the line. Maybe your father's sister's neighbor is an executive somewhere that'll meet me and offer me a job. Maybe you'll need tech help or a photographer and I can help. You just never know.

After two decades, it's safe to say that Dr. Jim knows what I have to offer in life and has factored that into his decision. Things should be weighed and measured. Ask the question "why?" Consider two things - value added and felt effect. What is the value added to life by a person? If you know the answer and it's nothing, then walk. If it's a stranger, then there's no way you know yet and should find out. If the felt effect is positivity or negativity adjust accordingly. If you haven't felt an effect of someone, give it time.

Dr. Jim hasn't walked away from me. He was just a reference point because he knows me well enough to make that decision. Maybe he does think I'm a prick. I called him something similar yesterday - I think it was an impatient asshole - but he supported it and thinks he is one too. Actually I was just teasing him because as a doctor he's supposed to have patients... or patience - that was the joke. Besides, he needs me for tech advice. I need him for doctor advice so we're stuck with each other.

Anyway, I know it goes against the grain. I shouldn't care about strangers and I should care about those close to me. At least that's what societal norms tell me. I just don't see it. Maybe I overanalyze people the way I do situations and that's why I need to know someone well before deciding they are a jerk. I have no idea. I guess what it comes down to is that when I meet someone new I'm leery about making a decision because I'm not sure what I'm losing out on down the line. Simply, I hedge my bets, back my wins and cut my losses - but I gotta know the odds before I do any of it. Phrased in the way of a true gambler, right?

Maybe you agree, maybe you don't. Just think about it the next time you meet someone new and pull away. Think about all the ways this person may play into your life and if you don't know any of them yet, you may wanna hang tight until you do. You could be missing a great opportunity.

Overall, just be informed. It never hurts to know, read, understand, see or comprehend MORE.

People in glass houses with loose lips call the kettle black

I like proverbs, cliches and stereotypes. I know that's not politically correct to say, but I don't like political correctness. This is why my mouth has always gotten me in trouble. I believe in honesty, transparency and, most importantly, context. Words are not bad, in and of themselves. Not much really is. Until the mini-mustachioed Hitler held it up to a mirror, stuck it in an falcon's claw and emblazoned it on a flag; what we know today to be a swastika was actually a sign of good luck in Tibet. It's connotation that ruins things for everyone.

Stereotypes are often given a bad rap. Stereotypes are stereotypically bad. That sounds like a mighty fine level of hypocrisy to me. How can apply a blanket policy that bans blanket policy as a society. This plays in so many parts of life, but often takes up residence in racial settings. I'm in the military. We're a fairly diverse bunch. Being a northerner, or damn Yankee as I'm called down here, I have to learn to live with all kinds of people, over 99% of which are not even a little bit like me. I have no problem with it. It is because of that I take issue when I apply a stereotype and get yelled at.

What is a stereotype exactly? Oxford English dictionary tells me it is a "widely held, but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing." So would a saying like - all lemons are sour be a stereotype? That idea is widely held. It's fixed in people's minds and I'd say it's over simplified because the lemon eaters of the world will say there's more to a lemon than it's sourness. Does anyone come to the aid of the defenseless lemon? So I'm being a bit silly, but that's the definition. How do stereotypes come to be? The same things happen over and over again. Acts are perpetrated by a class or group of people with a unifying characteristic so often that it comes to be expected.

Let's look at the post-9/11 world. Do we say that all bearded people are terrorists? Nope. We do, often, say that Muslims are terrorists. This is not necessarily true. There are many Muslims that couldn't be further from terrorists. However, let's look at changing the qualifier. Can't say Asians, even though the part of the world that we are at odds with is really in Asia because people think of the far east. So what do you say? Dark complexioned people? I'm mostly Sicilian and I turn straight brown by August. I'm not a terrorist, nor are my ancestors. So we default to the religious aspect. For the sake of science, let's consider those alternatives. How many acts of terrorism have been carried out by Christians (post Crusades)? Jews? When's the last time a Buddhist monk set anything on fire besides himself? Looking at acts of terrorism in our current world, they are religiously charged and completed by Muslims. Granted, they are Muslims of the extremist variety and maybe that qualifier should be added when discussing it but at its core, that's the religion creating the drama. There's quite a bit more than a modicum of truth to the thought about Muslims and terrorists.

So I use stereotypes. I didn't make the X-number of people of a particular race/ethnicity/religion/geographical location/etc do something so many times that it becomes expected, but I'm sure as shit not going to dance around the fact that the association is made. Maybe that's an opportunity for the good eggs of the group to become advocates for their people to spur disassociation. Positive outreach, perhaps?

Understanding that stereotypes, like ANYTHING, have exceptions and are generalizations rather than rules, make the whole thing ok in my book. Unfortunately, the coddling that goes on requires us to be sensitive and not say it out loud. There's that "the whole truth" thing I spoke about a few days ago.

Proverbs or cliches (defined by the level of cheesiness, I believe) are something else that I'm a real big fan of - hence the title. Yes, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. People may look at your glass house and see you naked. Actually, I think it's because someone may throw a stone back and break your house, which incidentally is your own fault for living in a glass house. That's gotta be expensive to heat in the winter, too. I get it. Don't judge people. I hate being judged. It's one of the worst things in the world and I'm at odds with some people currently over it. There is a difference between fair and unfairly judging people I think. If I do something that applies to and affects only me, I shouldn't be judged by anyone. It's my business. When I overstep my freedoms and my bad choices affect other innocents, then it's no longer my business. You can also judge my actions, but not me as a person. You can judge my actions because some things are just wrong - by society, law, or morals. It's safe to say that punching a stranger in the nose is something that people can pass judgment on.

Loose lips sink ships. I think loose seals in the hull... or an iceberg... may sink ships, but loose lips? (by the way, please don't ever say lose. That means it's misplaced and you can't misplace your lips... they're attached to your head). Maybe if the captain of a ship is talking to a pretty girl too much instead of steering than loose lips can sink a ship. I guess the meaning there is that people who talk to much, let word get around that may or may not be true and it undermines the effectiveness of a team of people. Rumor mill type stuff. That's my guess.

The pot calling the kettle black. First of all, what if the pot is green and the kettle is black? Then why the hell would the pot NOT call the kettle black? Really people. What if the pot is a dark gray and it's not in a well lit area? It could appear to be black. What if the pot is color blind? Has anyone considered these scenarios? So let's say it's noon on a sunny day and they're both black. The pot shouldn't call the kettle black, even though it is and everyone can see it. I shouldn't say something bad about someone that does something wrong because I've done that too. Maybe I didn't mean to. Maybe I've atoned for it. Maybe the kettle is not penitent for his transgression. Frankly, the situation that surrounds the act may make it worse for one person than another. But then there's the glass house thing again. Geez, nobody can have an opinion anymore.

Here's the thing (and we'll use the Muslim terrorist reference again). I judge them. I talk about them. I'm negative, but I do it in context and as it applies to me. You think I care that Muslims don't like how I live my life? Nope. They can cover their wives and kneel on their flying carpets all day long and hate me because I don't. But when they choose to try to end my life over it, I'm gonna be pissed about it. I can throw stones at their houses, which is usually worthless since theirs are made of stone anyway. But if they lived in glass ones I could throw stones at it. I do my thing, in my country, on my own, as it applies to me. And I say, in deference to them, you do your thing and I'll do mine. As for the pot/kettle thing, I suppose I could take flack for being in the military and causing death and destruction since they do the same, but there's a big, Big, BIG difference. I help kill enemy combatants. They kill whoever is standing nearby, including themselves. I'm part of a military that's acting in response to their attacks. Self-defense and self-preservation. We were fine to ignore them until they showed up with a sucker punch (more than once - remember 1993?).

I guess the point is that... well I'm not really sure to be honest. Wait... I think I found it. Using judgmental cliches about why people are bad for judging others may sound silly, but it's the context that makes the difference. I was going to write a whole post on judging people and hypocrisy but I think this may have covered it actually.

If I listen to my TV loudly and you don't like it, don't judge me. If you listen to your TV so loudly that it wakes me up from another apartment, I'll judge you because your actions infringe on mine and that's wrong. That's rude. I can think you're rude over the whole thing. If what I'm doing affects only me then you have no place to tell me it's wrong because it's simply not your business.

And to think, the whole post could have been done in 5 sentences. Where's the fun in that though?

Who is surprised?

If you're reading this AND a friend on Facebook, you should have seen a status from earlier today that said, "So what you're saying is that a super rich movie star with political power that's known for being a womanizer has cheated on his wife. I don't know about you but I'm shocked." Let's retrace the governator's steps. He gets his start by being one of the most famous bodybuilders and Mr. Universe. It's no secret that many women like a well built man. He moves into movies and we're talking about tough guy, badass movies. He's an action hero. Girls want him and guys want to be him. Both combined he's got enough financial worth to give everyone in his home country $50,000,000 each. He married a Kennedy. His latest endeavor made him governor of California. That's the man we're dealing with.

So yesterday we find out he had a child out of wedlock. According to several websites, 41% of marriages have one or both parties admit to infidelity, 57% of men admit to it in any relationship they've had, and 74% of men claim they would have an affair if they knew they'd never get caught. These are normal people, not the folks from Hollyweird. Now think about how many celebrities you hear about having affairs. Now, just for giggles think about the men that share blood with Maria Shriver... yeah the Kennedy's were no angels. Ok, back to the point. Oh, I forgot a fact. Mrs. Terminator said publicly, today that she knew for years he was a womanizer.

So, I ask you... where's the surprise coming from? Do I condone what he did? Absolutely not. Do I understand why such a high profile person would ever do that give the amplified risks and so much more to lose? Not even a little. Does any of this surprise me one iota? Not a chance.

If he was a nobody, would this get press? No way because people do it all day long. What about a regular governor that wasn't a celebrity or household name outside of his or her state? It'd get mentioned. Constituents would be furious and then use it as a means to get "their guy" in office and then it would die. So why is it worse or even more newsworthy when it's Arnie? It's not. It's LESS newsworthy because his situation has the writing on the wall that it would happen long before it did happen. I think he's just lucky he's not dealing with the Kennedy family of the 1950s or he's be in a heap of trouble. I don't care how big Arnold is, Ol' Joe Kennedy would whoop his ass. He was tough for a Democrat.

And can the Communist News Network (you call it CNN), please drop the outrage that he lied to his voters? How many of his voters are a) California hippies that are busy eating granola in trees or trying to restore The Haight to the glory days of 1967 or b) busy cheating on their spouses in a cheap motel with no TV in the first place? Did you really think he was gonna come out and say anything before he had to?

Does the fact that he had naughty time with someone other than Maria mean he can't make sound decisions about budgets and laws? What's the real harm for the voters? Yes it's wrong and dishonest. Did you elect him because you liked the way he treated his wife or for his policies? His personal life is exactly that - personal.

Oh and partisan folks using party lines to blame this on the Republicans and use the conservative family values thing against him; I've got something for you too. Who cheated while holding a very special circular office? Clinton. Party? Democrat. Who else? Kennedy. Party? Democrat. I'm not getting on the case of the Dems. Just saying that party lines have nothing to do with this. The only lines Conan was interested in were panty lines.

So back to my original question - who is surprised?

Let's be friends

I'm not actually asking. More or less I'm making fun of most people. See, this is the new default policy due to social networking. It is as if the the entire world is some tween girl cheerleader. They meet someone and 3 seconds later it turns into "OMG. We SO have to be BFFs on Facebook." Grow up. I love Facebook, Twitter, and all social media. I truly do. The value is limitless in business and finding old friends or growing new relationships. However, you may notice that my Facebook friends list went from 650 to 413 and on Twitter I have 321 followers, but only follow 244 people.

The world today consists of "friending" everyone you've ever met, know of through someone else, heard of as a celebrity, or may have seen on the street and had the wherewithal to use your stalker ability, spidey-sense and Sherlock Holmes clue finding skills to track down and friend request in a total non-creepy way. And there has developed a subculture about accepting these friend requests. People feel awkward denying them and it's even harder to delete them once they've made it to the inner sanctum of your Facebook friends list that contains only the closest of confidants, right? I don't get it either, but it's happened.

Not to me, holmes. I'll deny a friend request faster than you can say "Mark Zuckerberg made me do it" and just because you've been accepted it doesn't mean you can't be voted off my virtual island. Admittedly, I'm quicker to deny someone than delete someone. Let's consult with our good friend Webster on the matter. This is a friend request. So how is friend defined - a person whom one knows and with whom one has a bond of mutual affection. Well I'll be damned. A person whom one knows - so that eliminates all the people that friend me because I'm in the military just like their sister's boyfriend's cousin's hairdresser's next door neighbor. That also eliminates the people who friend request me because they graduated from the same high school as me, except they did it in 1974. This also includes someone that I may have met once. I know who you are, but I don't know you.

The 2nd half deserves its own paragraph. Mutual affection. That means we have to like each other. There goes the ex-wife. There goes the group of people I suffer through each day at work and we're only in contact because the federal government says we have to be. That even excludes pretty much anyone I just met. Just because we laughed together once, doesn't mean there's a mutual affection there.

Now... I understand I said it's a good way to grow new relationships. That means I'm not going to blindly exclude everyone. I don't believe in blanket policies... unless the policy is about everyone giving me money. But let's not swing all the to other side of the spectrum and blindly accept every person we've ever laid eyes on either. 

I'm seeing this happen right now as a matter of fact with one individual who is friending every single person. So this person recently met a bunch of new people all at once. I suppose they all got along well enough for the time they spent. Then this person pretty much disappeared. Even the tether to the crowd that this individual had in the first place is more or less nonexistent lately. But... friend requests are popping up faster than zits on a adolescents face - and across all platforms. People have chatted about it, "Dude, another request from you know who on X network." 

1) If you're friends with someone in life and online, do you need to be friends with them EVERYWHERE? Most people I'm friends with on either Facebook OR Twitter and only very few I keep on both. Those are usually business people or those that put out unique content between the 2.

2) If you're barely friends with someone in life, what's the value of chasing them up and down the information superhighway?

3) If you're getting denied in some places, why the hell would you chase them to others? 

You don't have to be friends with everyone, everywhere, every moment of the day. Some people just don't like you. Sometimes, people don't get along. This is why the amazing invention of the Internet in its amazing iteration of Web 2.0 is bloated and stuffy with more nonsense than value. It's why the social web has jumped the shark and we need to rethink it again.

Maybe it's time we think of what it means to be a friend, what we're sharing online and if we really want all these people to see it constantly. And also consider the level of desperation shown when you feel the need to friend everyone within minutes of meeting them. I think it's creepy, frankly.

What's your motive?

So often I speak of life back home and a life once lived. I tell you tales of where I've been and what I've done and how I cam to be where I currently am. I talk of family and friends and area. What I tell you is just a small portion. There is such a sense of community and belonging in that area. It's geographical, it's cultural, and to a degree it's even religious. Italians and Catholics go hand in hand where I'm from. I don't see or feel that here. I'm not sure if it's a southern thing or a military thing or a little of both. I haven't been stationed north of the Mason-Dixon line nor had an opportunity to do my due diligence and narrow it down to a part of my subculture. It's quite possible that it's just me.

What I do know is that it's changed me. The quid pro quo in my life upsets me. I do, you do is the theme. Rarely, it seems, does someone go out of their way for another without expecting something in return. A few weeks ago, while I was laid up from surgery, my buddy Ty came over and cleaned my house because I simply was unable to. He didn't want anything in return. He then offered to invite me over to his house for dinner, again without looking for a thank you of equal value. I chose to buy the ingredients for dinner as a means to say thank you, but not because I was made to feel obligated to do so. Unfortunately, this is a rarity as of late.

Dr. Jim and I would often talk about the approaches to friendship in terms of money. He and I owe each other between $10 and $20 at any given moment. I buy beers, he buys beers. It doesn't always work out evenly. If we went out to eat, we'd split the check down the middle since there was two of us. Did we consume $25 each? Not always. The money works out over time between friends and if it doesn't, who cares? It's not like I'm buying Jim a $200 iPhone and he picks up a pack of smokes for me which creates a disparity of about $194. It's a few bucks between lifelong friends.

I don't expect everyone to think like I do on this matter. Plus we all come from different financial backgrounds. I may say "aw hell, what's 20 bucks?" and someone else may not readily part with that. I will say that I find it's easier when the natural ebb and flow of money between friends runs it course instead of nitpicking. The check at a restaurant seems to be the biggest. Smartphone calculators or apps for splitting to the penny sometimes come out. "You owe $19.37 and I only owe $17.55." That's petty squabbling in my opinion. In the end, I'm gonna drop a $20 bill and be done with it anyway. (Tip notwithstanding. I'm generalizing).

I don't care about the money. People with money rarely do. I look at people like my dad or Alan, who work their respective tails off to be successful. They aren't successful because they watch every penny. They have no problem spending money, but they take huge issue with wasting it. I'm the same way. Locally, to my insular society in the military, I feel fairly unique. As a result, I end up being withdrawn in my approach and buy my own beers at the bar and don't let people pick things up for me because I don't like  being made to feel like I'm beholden to someone over it. So I take care of myself and let them do the same.

Unfortunately, these behaviors affect me because I'm on love with sociology. I look at the "whys" of people's behavior. I think "why" is the most important question in life. So, everyone once in a while someone does something nice that is totally unexpected and for no reason at all and my first reaction is to wonder, "what's in it for them?" when in reality, they're just being thoughtful. This happened today.

Anyone who knows me is aware of my sweet tooth. I'm no big on chocolate or candy bars, but put cake or a cupcake in front of me and you better be sure to get those fingers away in time. I'll fight someone over cheesecake - try me. Here in Biloxi we have a place called Frostings. They are totally decadent cupcakes and instead of icing on top only, they have a big divot in the middle and the frosting goes inside. They are rich and sweet and more than one at a time is sure to put you in a diabetic coma. I stay far, far away because even looking at the building kicks the insulin production into overdrive. I think you get the point.

Because of my transparency online, everyone knows most of what I do. Some people don't understand why I share so much, but that's besides the point. Out of the blue today, someone told me they had something for me. My first reaction was to hope it was a) a gorgeous woman, b) a duffelbag full of cash, or c) a gorgeous woman holding a duffelbag full of cash. It was none of the above, but it was a cookies n' cream cupcake from Frostings and it appeared on my desk at work while I was teaching.

Here is why this is important. It was purchased by someone I've known since I first got here in Mississippi, however not someone I see often or really at all. We speak on Facebook or when we happen to be in the same company by happenstance. We've never really be particularly close, but always get along well enough. I work with her husband. She must have been up at or near Frostings and knows I'm a big fan of moist chocolate cake slathered in vanilla buttercream with crumbled Oreo pieces mixed in (honestly, who wouldn't be? Communists, I tell ya). It's not expensive - just a couple of bucks. And even though I'm sure this person was already standing at the counter for her own purposes and did very little to add my cupcake to her order, I feel she really went out of her way to think of me.

And there's the rub. In today's society and my particular section of it, when something so small and innocuous happens, my first thought is "what don't I know?" and that really sucks. Are we all so self absorbed that we don't think of anyone else, so when someone things of us we are mistrusting? Maybe there are some people left who do nice things for nice people for no real reason other than to just, simply, be nice. That is what happened today, for sure.

I guess I just hate that this such a rarity that a simple nice deed comes with cynicism. I hate that it's a big enough even to spawn a 1180 word blog post about it. At the same time, it's nice to be pleasantly surprised like this and have some faith in the thoughtfulness of people restored (before some bonehead chips away at it again).

Anyway, the cupcake was delicious and a wonderfully simple surprise that was very unexpected both in timing and by the individual. So... thanks Angela.

That baby is ugly

Have you ever said that? I bet not. It doesn't matter what a baby looks like, you'll call it cute to its parents face. What about in metaphor? Ever sugar coat stuff or pull your punches instead of laying things out on the line? I bet you have. We all do. It is exhausting.

I can't quite figure out why we do it either. If someone asks our opinion, why don't we give it? Why do we give a false opinion to make them smile? If they knew we were full of shit, they probably wouldn't smile. It's a tough call. Some people claim they want to hear the truth but flip out when they do. Others lose their minds when they're lied to. I'm guilty of the same duality. I HATE being lied to, but the truth hurts. Even though both hurt, there's a difference. I can respect the person that tells the truth. Not the coward that lies and can't speak up.

I got to thinking about this because I know someone who has a baby that is NOT cute. I mean not at all. I avoid photos of this child like the plague. The parents, of course, think the baby is the most adorable thing. I'm a big fan of babies and generally love them and think they are adorable. This child, however... yikes. So what do I do? Do I open up like I say you should or do it fall victim to my own hypocrisy? I find a middle ground. I say nothing at all. I don't comment one way or the other. I want to, so badly, say what I think but why break a parent's heart. I'm nobody to them and would generally have to go out of my way to do it and that's just malicious. However, I will NOT lie. I understand that lying by omission is supposedly just as bad but I disagree. Withholding a hurtful truth is not as bad as telling a boldface lie. So that's my position.

I'm assuming the parents think the baby is cute as all parents do. It's subjective and blinded by love. I don't have a kid so I don't understand that unconditional love. I think if it was my baby I'd understand why tigers eat their young.

This child aside, do you ever call the baby ugly in life? I think we all should. Maybe we shouldn't call real babies ugly because of the detriment to the parents, but the metaphorical babies should. If a situation/action/behavior is fucked up we should say it. If one person does it, it'll leave that person alone and unpopular. If everyone does it, it'll become the norm and be ok.

Imagine that... friends, family, colleagues, acquaintances, neighbors, etc all being... ready for it? HONEST with each other. When someone acts like a jackass, people tell them. Then that person will stop acting like a jackass. Revolutionary concept.

A good friend tells me when I'm being a maniac. Bad friends support me blindly. I have both in my life. Some will always tell me I'm right and foster more lunacy. Dr. Jim, for example, is the first to tell me I'm out of my mind and shut me down. Sometimes that's what we need.

Before we can work on the words we say - honest or lies - we have to work on opening our mouths and saying ANYTHING to begin with. We usually avoid topics that are right in front of our faces.

More about elephants in the room another time though.

The way the media misconstrues things

There is simply no truth in journalism anymore. Bloggers have ruined web news I think. Let's keep things straight however, when I say bloggers like that, I don't mean you and I who freewrite our feelings to the world. I'm talking about the journalist bloggers. The ones who are not journalists, but report stories. They have flooded the web with half truths. Legitimate journalists race to get stories out but are beaten to the punch by the web journalists. Fact finding is a joke. Sources are not credible and the one thing that should always be factual - quoting - is the most butchered part of the story. Web journalism has also given every writer the right to opine along with report. Once again, a personal blog that's based on opinion is one thing; slanted reporting of the news is quite another.

Today I was reading a column by the loony, lefty, liberals about an opinion toward the "Radical Right-Wing Agenda." They were picking Ron "Ross Perot Ears" Paul. According the tree huggers, Ron Paul does not support civil rights. Not what he said. They claim he wouldn't have voted for the civil rights bill in 1964. Only PART of what he said.

Here's the story... he admitted he would not have voted for the 1964 civil rights bill - AS IT WAS WRITTEN. He did not agree with the parts for property owners. He never said he doesn't support civil rights, hippies. Don't choke on your granola, or do. Whatever. All of the details are left out because the left-wingnuts are not big fans of logic and/or sense. They want to scream and yell and find things to get fired up over without thinking it through and providing a sound, rational conclusion. There is no discussing things with them. I even tried to ping some of the nature lovers about the topic and they just responded with "he doesn't support civil rights." I said, "did you hear the whole story?" and got back "I heard enough, he's anti-civil rights." That's closed minded and ridiculous.

It was said to him, "Honestly, Congressman, you were not for the '64 civil rights bill."
He responded, and here comes a quote, "Because of the property rights element, not because it got rid of the Jim Crow law."

See... he's for overruling Jim Crow, just as any sane person should be. Obviously, segregation is ridiculous and wrong. He's not arguing against that an iota. He had one problem with one part of the bill and wouldn't have voted for it under its exact verbiage. What a horrible man he is right? He wanted to make change to a bill, but all the flower-power nutballs hear is that this guy was for racism and segregation.

So what's this property stuff he disagreed with anyway? Private property owners should have the right to bar entry. And you know what? I agree. It's not a black/white thing. It's a person who is paying mortgage and insurance and everything else reserves the right to ban anyone inconsistent with his/her own views of the world. I have no problem with any particular race or religion. To each, their own right? However, should an owner of a Christian bookstore have the right to remove a Satanist form their store? Let's say the Satanist is open displaying his/her beliefs within the bookstore. I say yes. Who is paying those bills? The owner. And the owner should retain the right to do what's best for the business. End of story.

That doesn't mean an owner can say, "You're X race, get out." (where x is whatever race the owner doesn't like), but if an individual based on appearance, race, etc is detrimental to the PRIVATE business, then that's that.

I once fired a girl who worked for me in a video store. She was very.... natural. She didn't believe in the removal of hair from the female body. She would wear tank top shirts and skirts. She was also petite which meant there was a lot of reaching over her head to put movies back on the shelves. I was not a fan but I was also unaffected. I received several complaints from customers, some of whom were regulars and refused to return. I had a choice to make. She got fired for inappropriate/unprofessional appearance in the workplace. Did my customers overreact? I think so. However, they keep the lights on in the place with their money. She does not. I didn't own the place, but as a store manager I had to do what was right for the business. She was a good employee, did her job, was polite, etc. Politeness doesn't pay the bills, customers do. So, the customers won.

That's the point of all of this. I'm not a tremendous Ron Paul supporter, but I'm also not a fan of the media MISQUOTING to get a point across. Ron Paul had an opinion. The media told the world of it (in their own way that changed his entire opinion). I don't see how THAT is fair.

We need SOMEONE with some damn sense

I am, apparently, incapable of staying quiet. I said I was going to do it on here and on Vig The Geek and other places, but I can't. I'm a big mouth. I have opinions. And in a world riddled with stupidity, ignorance, and people who like to twist words, I feel that my analysis of situations is a shining beacon of truth. Is that too grandiose of a description? Oh well... I don't particularly care.

So here's how this works. I'm going to post on MY blog. You can read it and love it - which I hope you will. You can read it and hate it - which makes no sense to me because I stay away from things I hate. You can just not read it at all if you don't like it - sounds like what makes sense. You can comment and provide intellectual feedback (positive or negative). We can get into discussion or debate all day long. You can even use your motivation or irritation at me to create your own blog and share your thoughts with the world. What you absolutely CANNOT do is read my posts and in a cowardly fashion anonymously vilify me. That's just not going to happen. I will either a) not even allow your comment to post or b) spend twice as much time eviscerating your in a literary fashion.

This is why I liked Myspace... just because of the name. It was MY space, not your space. You had your own space and I had mine. The meaning was terrific. Didn't like it? I didn't care. It was mine, not yours. But after years of posting status updates on Myspace and subsequently Facebook and articles on the web for news agencies, blog posts here, videos on YouTube, countless comments on forums, etc - I let the trolls get to me.

In my absence from posting I had an epiphany. Not a super bright, life changing epiphany, but one I should have already known and had a while ago. I couldn't give a shit less what people think. I write these because of the catharsis. I'm not paid, I'm not obligated. If you read them and agree, then great. If not, oh well. I like to write. I like word play. This gives me an opportunity and, just maybe, someone learns something in the process. Overall, this is for me, though, not you.

Now, because I let all the negative Nancys get to me and I shut down, I ended up with thoughts (that should have turned into posts) piling up. This means I'm going to have a lot to say in the not too distant future so be prepared to enjoy them or ignore them. Also, be prepared to be ignored if you come back with some snide, nasty remark.

I'll talk to you soon.

Breadth of hiatus expanded

Yesterday I shut down operations on the Vig The Geek brand in all aspects. Vig The Geek was the technology advice and information part of JayVig Media. I stopped all research and production on new videos and canceled publishing on future written articles for my national gadgets and tech column with examiner.com. It was a simple economic decision measuring cost to value and ROI; neither of which proved fruitful.

I've been thinking a lot more about transparency. I've been living very transparently for the last couple of years online. My life is available on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and others. You can buy digital shares of me like a stock on Empire Avenue. I measure my worth and reach on Klout. I'm in everybody's face in the technology sector and have made inroads and contacts in most of the major tech corporations around the globe as well as many, many startups. My Facebook page is not private and everything I do is on display. I firmly believed in having nothing to hide and increasing your social graph by sharing. The very nature of social networking and media requires sharing and less privacy. So I adopted that principle heavily. I figured I needed to if I expected those I consult with as businesses to follow suit. This mentality permeated and pervaded every part of my life.

Now that things aren't at their peak in my life, I need to make a change. To hell with the fact that blogging is cathartic and the wonderful comments I generally receive on my writing. The Tao of Vig is halting as well after today. I was raised to believe that honesty is the best policy; that we should be open and honest with how we feel and think. Bold face lies are no better or worse than misrepresenting oneself or lying by omission. The truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth, right? I didn't always subscribe to that policy while younger, like many teenagers I'm assuming. But now I do. I'm very open. People do not have to guess what I'm thinking or feeling - I'll tell them straight up every time. No sugar coating or punch pulling here. You ask a question, you get an answer. Unfortunately, that seems to create more distress in my life than anything else. I'm resistant to accepting that because I find it hard to believe that people want to be lied to just to have their egos stroked, but I guess that's human nature.

I'm not sure how I've become who I've become. Maybe I'm frustrated with myself for still working on a 4 year degree for 14 years. Maybe my paycheck makes me grumpy. Maybe I'm sick of being far away. Maybe I wanna strangle my ex-wife for her behavior - without her I never would have reenlisted and I wouldn't be stuck here totally fucking alone. All I know is that every time I open my mouth with an honest, unadulterated response, I'm met with shock and horror on the faces of people lately. I really think that America is so used to being placated that when someone doesn't automatically started holding hands and saying "it's all gonna be ok. you're super special" that people are taken aback.

I've made myself exposed and vulnerable via my blogs, articles, videos, and posts for years now. I've been jabbed at nearly every turn (excepting a few devout supporters). I'm tired of being judged for being me. You're you. I'm me. That's how it is.

Am I hiding? Sure, a little bit I am. Running away is not my style but I've overindulged in sharing for so long that now I'm overcorrecting for all of it until I can find a happy middle. Will I be back here? Of course. Maybe sooner rather than later. I suppose it's all dependent on the muse and then inspiration to write overcomes me.

In the meantime, I'm just going to live my life. If you're a part of it, you can continue to see it. For those that aren't, I'm not going on display.

The problem here is that I truly do believe in total transparency for people and businesses and it's against my nature to hide. Unfortunately, most other people don't share my passion for media and social involvement so whether I'm right or not in my views, in the meantime they won't work. Maybe in my absence society will catch up.

So....
JayVigMedia.com - on hold
VigTheGeek.com - closed
The Tao of Vig - temporarily suspended.
Facebook - active, but decidedly more private

Just another wallflower, for now, living my life, doing my thing quietly and privately. See you after a while.

Proof is in the logic

So now that the fanfare has died down concerning the killing of Osama Bin Laden, everyone is using their Internet muscles to scream about wanting proof that it's him and not a doppleganger. Of course it's him. The government did DNA testing to verify that. Oh wait, you don't trust the government? Neither do it. You think they're idiots? Me too. However, let's assume that amongst all of them, even the simplest principles can be applied. Now let's weigh the pros and cons of lying and what his death really means.

As we know, Jihad is the struggle of Islam and in our case, refers to martyrdom for most of our enemies. So, the way I see it, there were a couple of ways for Osama Bin Laden to have died with a couple of results.

First, is that we found him in some subterranean shithole, dead, covered in his own shit with a low battery warning on his dialysis machine. Did he die for his cause? With pride? Is he a martyr? I'm gonna say the answer is a huge, resounding NO.

Second, we kill him. The infidel Americans take him out and he dies for his cause. He's a hero and a martyr and every Islamic nutball with an AK-47 and too much opium in his bloodstream wants to be just like him. He died for Jihad and is a hero to his people. This is what happened.

If we kill him, we reignite his cause. If he dies in a Pakistani cave, a lot of his cause dies with him. So... why lie? If anything, they should have killed him and said they found him, already dead.

Next, there are thousands and thousands of Americans with wide open wounds since 9/11, many of which will never heal entirely and some not at all. This is a little closure. Unless our government is not just inept, but purposeful about hurting citizens, why lie?

So if YOU were to see a body, could you determine it was him? If you saw a death certificate or the DNA results, YOU could verify them to be true? Our government makes mistakes at times (as does every individual person screaming for proof), but this is such a major event that means to much, I find it hard to believe that they'd lie or overlook simple details.

Will there be retaliation from Muslim extremists? I'd say so. Will someone take his place? I'd say so. Is the war over? Absolutely not. Some Americans, will lash out at Muslims because, let's face it, we've got some dummies. The war could escalate. Again, why lie?

He was not solely responsible for 9/11. He didn't even plan much of the operations of the event. He was the front man for Al Qaeda. He's a motivator to those people as well. He's the one that delivered messages of terror around the world. The bottom line is that he was the association to 9/11 and terrorism in the minds of many people. So is that why the government would fake his death? Well, then what's to stop him from appearing on TV, if he's still alive, which would strike more fear into the hearts of Americans.

If it's not true, why now? As someone very personally connected to 9/11 I can tell you that my joy last night was mitigated by the rush of negative emotions surrounding that day. Why bring up so much hurt and pain and awful memories at just about the midway point through the year, when we'll all go through it again on the anniversary this September? The 10th anniversary at that.

I suppose the bottom line is that nobody really knows and now the son of a bitch is at the bottom of the ocean, but is there really ANY sense whatsoever to lying or faking it? Can ANY good at all come of it? Use your heads and think it through. And by the way, just because the Internet allows it, it doesn't mean you have to speak every single thought to the world. Filter some of the nonsense. Realize that many Americana took much solace in the death of that man and all the conspiracy theories pulled just a little bit of joy away from the situation. Don't detract from it. Have your doubt, but don't spew it online. Many of us needed this.

So in reality, the only person causing heartache for Americans, is you. I think he's dead. I want to believe it. I have to believe it and logically speaking... I simply just believe it.

Case closed

There's no way that you're in front of the computer reading this and have not heard about the death of Osama Bin Laden by now. Tonight comes with such mixed emotions. Believe me when I tell you that sadness is not one of them. I'm happy. I'm relieved. I'm empowered. I have a level of closure. I'm also upset as a flood of memories, images, and hurt engulf me as a result of one man's actions.

We can talk about what this means in terms of retaliation and political maneuvering. We can talk about the president's speech. We can talk about the length of time it took to accomplish this. We can talk about what the future holds for our military. I don't want to talk about any of that. Not now. I'm busy basking in the glory of all of this. Our country needed this.

I'm a good person and I'm not a fan of death whenever possible. I don't wish death on our enemies (unless we're standing toe to toe and it's me or them). Look at how they live. They are uninformed. They are brainwashed. They are doing what they believe is right for their people. I wish we could all just do our own thing, but that's not a possibility. Most of them have families like our military folks. That man, however, is the one person on Earth that I have wished death upon for nearly ten years.

My viewpoint aside, the timing of this in my life is remarkable. As everyone of my readers knows by now, I spent my life growing up, working, and playing in and around New York City. It's my backyard. It's where I feel most comfortable. My recent blog posts spoke about working there and that pen that was given to me. I spoke of how it went missing. Then I recounted the tale of finding it.

For months it was missing. During the hunt, I stumbled on a newspaper of an article that was done on me as a 9/11 survivor currently serving in the military, with the pen in plain sight. Then it was found within 30 minutes. That was Thursday. It is now Sunday night and we got the news that Osama Bin Laden has been killed.

I could have found the pen the week after it went missing, but I didn't. Maybe I wasn't supposed to. The pen that represents my past, present and future - who I was, who I am, and who I will become again - just happened to be found this last week, after being spotted in a 9/11 related article and right before we killed the evil responsible for the twists and turns of my life.

Is it a message? It could be. It seems likely that is. Life, or God, or the universe, or fate wanted my story to be told to me again. I needed to be reminded of where I came from. The reminder steeled my resolve to return there. But there was something missing. The place I was going home to was the same place I left behind. The same hurt was there. The same memories haunted those streets. Tonight, that chapter has been closed.

I was given a highlight reel of the events surrounding this situation. It almost seems as if I wanted to go home but couldn't and now I can. All the memories needed to be at the forefront in one week long assault on my emotions. Every tear that I shed this week was bittersweet, including those from tonight. I'm happy at the news, but upset due to how it has impacted my life. I am no longer tormented by it. I no longer wait with bated breath for the end. I can finally say, "it's over." Justice has been served.

The timing is uncanny and, frankly, freaks me out a little bit. How can so many things, interlaced so tightly, wrap up at the same time? The damage and heartache have not been undone tonight. Some wounds will never fully heal. However, the victory that was achieved by our country is a major step in finding a much needed inner peace and the memory of who I was, the finding of my pen, and the death of my enemy all at once tell me that it's time to truly move on, if for the first time.

If nothing else, I feel just a tiny bit more intact than I have in nearly a decade.


**This is not well written. It's not witty, it's not truly profound. It does not have the usual flow or flair for the dramatic. My mind is all over and my emotions are far from being controlled. It is what it is.**